Macros for weightloss

Amyboocastro
Amyboocastro Posts: 5 Member
in Food and Nutrition
just wondering if any of you have any expertise on macro calcs. I'm currently 175 trying to drop 10lbs. My macros are 1650 Cals 144 carb 155 pro and 55 fat. Sound right-ish?? Is it better to cut fat or carbs when cutting? Thanks!-Amy

Replies

  • cajuntank
    cajuntank Posts: 924 Member
    edited April 2015
    Calories matter for weight loss. Macros matter for the body that's left over during/after weight loss assuming you are also providing a training stimulus.

    Are you losing weight at 1650 calories?
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Pu_239 wrote: »
    I was obessive over macros for weight loss. Didn't get much results, i started to focus on calories, and started to get good results. Eat food, hit your calories, you'll be fine.

    Macros are related to calories. If you were "obsessive" about tracking macros, you would have been hitting a certain number of calories whether you took notice or not

    OP - I'd lower carbs before fat if you need to make adjustments during your weight loss.
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    Pu_239 wrote: »
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    Pu_239 wrote: »
    I was obessive over macros for weight loss. Didn't get much results, i started to focus on calories, and started to get good results. Eat food, hit your calories, you'll be fine.

    Macros are related to calories. If you were "obsessive" about tracking macros, you would have been hitting a certain number of calories whether you took notice or not

    OP - I'd lower carbs before fat if you need to make adjustments during your weight loss.

    WHat i mean by being obsessive is it caused a lot of stress. Always trying to do things perfect. Yes it's about calories, but point is the stress just makes it difficult and can make people stop tracking, which would limit results.

    You said you didn't get results from tracking macros,but were obsessive about it. If you stopped because it was stressful, you got results from not tracking, macros wasn't the issue.
  • StacieJones0385
    StacieJones0385 Posts: 8 Member
    What I found works for me when I started counting g macros was 40/30/30 carb/ protein/fats. And when I got comfortable with that I started to increase my protein and lower my carbs. Keep your total calorie count stable and try to hit the macros as best you can. plan out your meals!
  • Amyboocastro
    Amyboocastro Posts: 5 Member
    cajuntank wrote: »
    Calories matter for weight loss. Macros matter for the body that's left over during/after weight loss assuming you are also providing a training stimulus.

    Are you losing weight at 1650 calories?

    Yes I started my cut a week and a half ago and I'm down 1.9#. I train 4-5days/week. Before that I was at about 2000 Cals/day bulking for a meet. Just wondering if I should pay more attention to carbs or fat for weight loss.
  • Amyboocastro
    Amyboocastro Posts: 5 Member
    Pu_239 wrote: »
    I was obessive over macros for weight loss. Didn't get much results, i started to focus on calories, and started to get good results. Eat food, hit your calories, you'll be fine.
    Ya I cut about 300-400 out depending on my activity. I track Cals just to keep myself accountable. I don't freak out if I go over. In fact I plan for about 100-200 cal le-way for stuff that doesn't get tracked like condiments, just cuz it's a pain in the *kitten* to track every oz of ketchup or bbq sauce ya know?

  • MoiAussi93
    MoiAussi93 Posts: 1,948 Member
    For me, cutting carbs seemed to really help increase the rate of weight loss, and made it easier to not overeat since the protein and fat kept me full better. If your current macros are working for you, stay there. If not, try slightly cutting carbs and replacing them with fat.
  • ASKyle
    ASKyle Posts: 1,475 Member
    Technically, IMO, what your calories are made up of will not affect weight loss. Your calorie deficit does that.

    Now, if you eat foods that make you feel more full, you will be less likely to eat over your calorie goal. For me, those macros are protein and fat. I can barely eat a large chicken breast, but I could polish off a whole bag of chips with no problem. Does this make sense?
  • ASKyle
    ASKyle Posts: 1,475 Member
    MoiAussi93 wrote: »
    For me, cutting carbs seemed to really help increase the rate of weight loss, and made it easier to not overeat since the protein and fat kept me full better. If your current macros are working for you, stay there. If not, try slightly cutting carbs and replacing them with fat.

    This is what I was trying to say.
  • icemaiden37
    icemaiden37 Posts: 238 Member
    ASKyle wrote: »
    Technically, IMO, what your calories are made up of will not affect weight loss. Your calorie deficit does that.

    Now, if you eat foods that make you feel more full, you will be less likely to eat over your calorie goal. For me, those macros are protein and fat. I can barely eat a large chicken breast, but I could polish off a whole bag of chips with no problem. Does this make sense?

    Well said.

    I'm a lot less hungry since starting 40/30/30 fat/protein/carbs. When I ate more carbs I found it much harder to stay within my calorie allowance. And once I start with the carbs it's really tricky to stop! They're so moreish, dammit!
  • livingleanlivingclean
    livingleanlivingclean Posts: 11,751 Member
    ASKyle wrote: »
    Technically, IMO, what your calories are made up of will not affect weight loss. Your calorie deficit does that.

    Now, if you eat foods that make you feel more full, you will be less likely to eat over your calorie goal. For me, those macros are protein and fat. I can barely eat a large chicken breast, but I could polish off a whole bag of chips with no problem. Does this make sense?

    They won't effect weight loss, but macros play a big part in body composition, and what type of weight you actually lose.
  • cajuntank
    cajuntank Posts: 924 Member
    Amyboocastro wrote: »
    cajuntank wrote: »
    Calories matter for weight loss. Macros matter for the body that's left over during/after weight loss assuming you are also providing a training stimulus.

    Are you losing weight at 1650 calories?

    Yes I started my cut a week and a half ago and I'm down 1.9#. I train 4-5days/week. Before that I was at about 2000 Cals/day bulking for a meet. Just wondering if I should pay more attention to carbs or fat for weight loss.

    If you have only been dieting a week and a half and you are losing, then stay the course for another 2-3 weeks. You need to get a better average of what your true average weight loss is and only dieting a little better than a week is not enough time. Being a woman, you might need to even go a little longer to get a true average due to water weight shifts. If after a couple of weeks you are losing on average about 1-1.5lbs a week, then I would stay the course. If losing less than that, you could drop calories some, but I would only do it by 50-100 calories in the form of carbs (so dropping about 10-25g of carbs a day) and run that for a few more weeks, then assess again. You want to make small changes and give those changes enough time.
  • ASKyle
    ASKyle Posts: 1,475 Member
    livingleanlivingclean wrote: »
    ASKyle wrote: »
    Technically, IMO, what your calories are made up of will not affect weight loss. Your calorie deficit does that.

    Now, if you eat foods that make you feel more full, you will be less likely to eat over your calorie goal. For me, those macros are protein and fat. I can barely eat a large chicken breast, but I could polish off a whole bag of chips with no problem. Does this make sense?

    They won't effect weight loss, but macros play a big part in body composition, and what type of weight you actually lose.

    I agree with you. However, to me, this is more advanced knowledge that you learn as you go, and is TMI for people who are just starting on here. I feel like a lot of people will read that as, "If I eat protein I will lose weight!" or "Carbs make you fat!" which is not an accurate statement.
  • tdespins
    tdespins Posts: 1 Member
    I would recommend cutting carbs before fat...fat will help satiation more than carbs. If you are currently weight training/working out, I typically try to hit .5-1g of protein per pound of weight and try to keep carbs at 100g or under and getting the rest of my calories from fats (for me around 60g). This has been really working for me. I have lost about 4.5 lbs in about 1.5 wks after being stalled for about 2 months. There are great free training programs on bodybuilding.com and I found IIFIYM (if it fits in your macros) website to be really helpful in determining macros for fat loss and weight loss. Also, be sure to take measurements and progress pics to help track because as you ditch fat and build muscle your weight may not go down but you may be losing inches. Also, I found when I first started tracking macros, to actually use a kitchen scale for a few weeks to measure/prep food to get a better idea of what a portion size looks like. I dropped most processed carbs and try getting my carbs from fruits/veggies and less from breads/pastas. Eat clean and lift heavy! Good luck!!
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,865 Member
    ASKyle wrote: »
    Technically, IMO, what your calories are made up of will not affect weight loss. Your calorie deficit does that.

    Now, if you eat foods that make you feel more full, you will be less likely to eat over your calorie goal. For me, those macros are protein and fat. I can barely eat a large chicken breast, but I could polish off a whole bag of chips with no problem. Does this make sense?

    I could polish off a whole bag of chips too and that would add up to a couple thousand calories...but a potato is also a carb...and I dare say that I couldn't eat 2,000 calories of a baked potato in one sitting.

    I think carbs get a bad rap because people auto jump to carbs = junk...when in reality there are a lot of nutritious and healthful carb sources out there.

    I'm of the school of eating moderate amounts of all three macro-nutrients and hitting those macros with overwhelmingly nutritious food options.
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    edited April 2015
    ASKyle wrote: »
    MoiAussi93 wrote: »
    For me, cutting carbs seemed to really help increase the rate of weight loss, and made it easier to not overeat since the protein and fat kept me full better. If your current macros are working for you, stay there. If not, try slightly cutting carbs and replacing them with fat.

    This is what I was trying to say.
    What you said originally was fine.
  • 999tigger
    999tigger Posts: 5,235 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »

    I could polish off a whole bag of chips too and that would add up to a couple thousand calories...but a potato is also a carb...and I dare say that I couldn't eat 2,000 calories of a baked potato in one sitting.

    I think carbs get a bad rap because people auto jump to carbs = junk...when in reality there are a lot of nutritious and healthful carb sources out there.

    I'm of the school of eating moderate amounts of all three macro-nutrients and hitting those macros with overwhelmingly nutritious food options.

    I think they get a bad rep because of the low carb diets and the people who are eating large amounts of protein trying to build muscle. Carbs are easy to demonise. I eat a healthy balanced diet and make sue I hit the min levels at least for protein and fibre. Carbs and fat take care of themselves. Also 5-10 fruit and veg.
  • Alex
    Alex Posts: 10,137 MFP Staff
    I have cleaned up this discussion a bit. If you aren't posting to answer the OP's question or you are posting to continue a debate, please move along.
  • ruthruth100
    ruthruth100 Posts: 1 Member
    Hi I've been doing 40-40-20 macros at 1500 calories a day for about 70 days. It works great for leaning you out. Love it. Lots of eating . Lots and lots of protein.

Categories